Kill Bill Reimagined (By NewSpock)

[NewSpock]

I understand the argument, that for some people 20 GB or even 13 GB might be too much for their internet-connection, but I don't agree with the argument that 6-7 k avg bitrate any anything above it would be a waste. My experience with 6-7k from edits here were that they looked nice, but lacked that last bit of definition and depth the bluray version I compared it to had. And it's not only lacking in the still-picture but especially in the moving of the pictures, where more bitrate would have been benificial.

I would really love to offer the 13,67 GB version as the release version, as I can only upload one version (due to limits on upload-space available), as I want the edit to look great on small screens as well as on 3 meter-beamers.

But if people have too much problems downloading such a size, I might opt to offer the 8,9 GB-version as the release-size. Will have to think about it some more.

 

[ThrowgnCpr]

But if people have too much problems downloading such a size, I might opt to offer the 8,9 GB-version as the release-size. Will have to think about it some more.

Again, I urge you to look at who is actually reading and commenting on this thread. If you want a 20 or 13 GB version for yourself, fine. But why even share your work if people tell you they won't download huge files? What is the point of this charade? If you are going to share your work with an audience, you better listen to what they actually want.

 

[Kal-El]

It's not just about the size, it's also about good rendering. Anything above roughly 6 or 7k avg bitrate on the video and you are absolutely just wasting file space in my opinion. I have a 55 inch newish tv and 20/10 vision and I've run many tests ( thanks hasmak!). Your 13gb file could be an 8gb file for the final version, and the preview should be lower quality and probably half that.

^That.

I understand the argument, that for some people 20 GB or even 13 GB might be too much for their internet-connection, but I don't agree with the argument that 6-7 k avg bitrate any anything above it would be a waste. My experience with 6-7k from edits here were that they looked nice, but lacked that last bit of definition and depth the bluray version I compared it to had. And it's not only lacking in the still-picture but especially in the moving of the pictures, where more bitrate would have been benificial.

It has absolutely zilch to do with the internet connection... Or at least that's a secondary issue. ninja is right in that you're wasting filespace. You say yourself that you don't have that much room on your (presumably free) MEGA account, so keeping that in mind, you're only hurting yourself by not following the advice given by other (very experienced and knowledgeable!) editors here. But don't take their word for it. This guy and this guy are pro's.

Also, minor nitpicking, but why upload 100MB files? Like I previously mentioned (and others agreed with me on this): your file uploads won't take as long if you upload bigger chunks. 500MB or even 1GB files instead of 100MB a pop. Your upload isn't allowed to pick up speed. By the time your upload can go faster, it drops off because it needs to upload the next file. If you upload bigger files, you give your browser time to pick up the pace. Just try it out and you'll see.

 

[addiesin]

If an edit is over 4GB and it's not a disc image, I usually wouldn't bother downloading at all. Downloads can be super slow, there can be parts missing, file sharing services can unexpectedly shut down, anything can happen in the middle of the download to corrupt it or prevent it from finishing. In these cases, smaller file sizes can mean more complete downloads.

Even if I did choose to download something larger than 4GB, like if it was something I really really wanted and waited for a long time, I'd download it and make a smaller copy myself, which is a real pain in the clock. My TV is HD but is not giant, I am not bothered by slightly lower quality rendering for a much more friendly size.

Everybody's different but my reaction to all these sizes goes like this:
20GB - This is so excessive you might as well just make it a disc.
13GB - I'd be shocked if you get more than three viewers, and all three must be die-hard Kill Bill fans.
8GB - This is still about double the size I'd personally be comfortable with downloading from an editor I trust and whose work I enjoy.
4GB - I would use this to make a disc or to make my own version for viewing that fits on a thumb drive or my PS3 comfortably.
2GB - That's what I'm talking about. This can live on my hard drive semi-permanently and most fanedit content I watch will tend to be around this size by the time it's on my screen.

Just offering another opinion.

 

[TV's Frink]

On my home planet we have a saying:

"You can lead a GleepGlorp to water, but you can't make it take a flurgo in it."

 

[NewSpock]

Will have to think about it some more.

I took a few days to just do that.

What do I want? That many people watch and enjoy the edit? Yes. But I also want to offer a certain quality in picture and sound, ideally as near to bluray-quality as possible.

So given those two interests I have to come to a compromise I can be happy with.

As a "source" I have a 56 GB file in apple prores (proxy) format. That is the resulting file exported using final cut pro x when finished with the editing. I use handbrake to convert it to mkv. The option I use and which I found to give me good results is "Constant quality". This means that the quality gets defined and then handbrake calculates how much bitrate is necessary in any given scene to reach that quality.

I set the slider of the quality on something between RF 18 and RF 22. For my private use I use RF 18, that's what resulted in the 20 GB-file in the beginning. For the preview-version I used RF 22 which resulted in a file of 8,9 GB.

I did a lot of comparisons and found that RF 22 while looking nice lacks some definition and depth that the bluray version offers, so for the release-version I'll use RF 20, which will give me a 13,67 GB file.

For some that might be too much, but the quality is really nice and Kill Bill has such a nice cinematography, with lush colours, that I think it deserves such a quality.

It's always possible to downsize the quality locally*, but it's technically not possible to upsize the quality locally if wished.


*though I recommend against doing that, since picture-quality adds to enjoyment and given the quality bluray offers, why would one want to downgrade it to something that looks more like a good dvd? Especially given the abundance of cheap and big memory these days.

 

[Kal-El]

I set the slider of the quality on something between RF 18 and RF 22. For my private use I use RF 18, that's what resulted in the 20 GB-file in the beginning. For the preview-version I used RF 22 which resulted in a file of 8,9 GB.

I did a lot of comparisons and found that RF 22 while looking nice lacks some definition and depth that the bluray version offers, so for the release-version I'll use RF 20, which will give me a 13,67 GB file.

I recommend making the preview version your final to-be-published version.
Aztek's 2-in-1 edit of 300 (and I checked!) is 7.78GB. Did you see that edit yet? IT'S GORGEOUS!
Still don't see any valid reason yours should be twice as big...

 

[TM2YC]

for the release-version I'll use RF 20, which will give me a 13,67 GB file.

I know KB is long (4 hours approx) but this still seems like too high a filesize. I'd have thought RF-20 would give you about half that?

Are you exporting in 1920x1080, or 1920x800 as has been suggested earlier in the thread (If I remember correctly). 16:9 HD is about 2 million pixels (2,073,600), so you've got a quarter of those pixels (537,600) just describing empty blackness.

 

[NewSpock]

I know KB is long (4 hours approx) but this still seems like too high a filesize. I'd have thought RF-20 would give you about half that?

Are you exporting in 1920x1080, or 1920x800 as has been suggested earlier in the thread (If I remember correctly). 16:9 HD is about 2 million pixels (2,073,600), so you've got a quarter of those pixels (537,600) just describing empty blackness.

I used 1920*1080, so including the black bars, under the assumption that black bars are compressed to basically nothing spacewise anyway because they don't contain information.

And I've read somewhere that when someone would want to create AVCHD out of it, it would be necessary to have the black bars included.

Will try out to use 1920*800 with RF 20, just to see how much filesize is saved.

 

[ThrowgnCpr]

black bars are compressed to basically nothing spacewise anyway because they don't contain information.

false.

And I've read somewhere that when someone would want to create AVCHD out of it, it would be necessary to have the black bars included.

true. but AVCHD is a dumb format, honestly. It's buggy, and doesn't always work on some players. If someone's player won't play an MKV, they can easily remux to a single MT2S file, burn that to disc, and play. I do this all the time, since my PS3 doesn't seem to like most AVCHD discs.

crop the black and release that way.

 

[TV's Frink]

AVCHD is a dumb format

.......................^My Austin Powers Sanitized AVCHD

Reveal message

Image with black bars chosen for relevance.

 

[NewSpock]

false.

You are right, converting it to mkv with 1980*800, ie. without the black bars saved nearly 4 GB. So the filesize is now at 9,76 GB at RF 20.

Hmm, given that I could use RF 18 to further improve quality and end up with 14 GB...

Reveal message

Just joking;-)

 

[TM2YC]

You are right, converting it to mkv with 1980*800, ie. without the black bars saved nearly 4 GB.

Kal-El told you this 9 days and 46 posts ago...

What you can also do is cut the black bars in your composition. The black bars on the top and bottom of your screen are being rendered as well, and that takes up size as well. If you downsize your comp, you spare room and therefore have less information to render, resulting in a smaller filesize.

...just saying.

 

[NewSpock]

True dat.

 

[Kal-El]

You are right, converting it to mkv with 1980*800, ie. without the black bars saved nearly 4 GB. So the filesize is now at 9,76 GB at RF 20.

Much better, there we go.

Kal-El told you this 9 days and 46 posts ago...
...just saying.

That's ok, thanks for reading my posts and remembering.

True dat.

It's not that my incessant rambling on quality or size is in any way meant to help you improve... ;-)

 

[NewSpock]

It's not that my incessant rambling on quality or size is in any way meant to help you improve... ;-)

 

[Neglify]

You could always make two files. One is the super-high-quality large size you think is best. The other is around 5 GB (or so) for the people who don't want to download such a large file. It's not difficult at all.

 

[NewSpock]

5 GB + 15GB= 20 GB
9 GB = 9 GB

It's much easier for me to keep track of one upload for an edit. So I'll keep to that one upload of 9 GB.

 

[TV's Frink]

Wut.

 

[ssj]

i know this isn't helpful, but i see. . .

five or six guys politely and charitably banging their heads bloody against a wall.